Confirm these markers are not eligable

Unsure as to why the community (part of the community) keeps approving yellow public footpath markers as waypoints, they exist in every single field in England with a public right of way, just because the submitter calls it some made up trail name doesn't make it a trail. Niantic states named trails only, where the marker exists on a route with a legitimate trial name and the marker displays this name.


Please confirm these are not eligible. (These are taken from IITC and already in game as wayspots.


Best. S


Tagged:
«13456

Comments

  • PkmnTrainerJ-INGPkmnTrainerJ-ING Posts: 3,077 ✭✭✭✭✭

    As much as I dislike these, Niantic have muddied the waters on this with a clarification they made;

    The new criteria lists hiking trails and biking trails as eligible examples under a great place for exercise. Are there any additional requirements for these locations to be eligible (e.g. survey markers, trail signs or other man-made objects)? Do they need to be named trails or paths?


    While this criteria is much more inclusive than before, there would still need to be some sort of visual indicator of the Wayspot. This is because you're dropping a pin on the map and since trails are long and linear, you'd want to direct players to a safe location somewhere along that trail that's easy to find and safe to access. This would apply to trail markers,

    survey markers, trail signs, etc.

    So with this, as Niantic didn’t say they needed to name specifically in their answer, some have taken it as “trails don’t need to be named now to be accepted and are submitting every bridleway and general footpath. They forget that rejection criteria also applies as mentioned here.

    The above quote was shared today in a social media group with almost 10k reviewers in, so this is a difficult one to convince reviewers about.

    There’s also the comments from @NianticGiffard about NCN markers which don’t help.  



  • PkmnTrainerJ-INGPkmnTrainerJ-ING Posts: 3,077 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I agree. Unfortunately a lot do seem to slip through and have been a problem especially in Shottix’s area from one or two players.

  • Oakes1923-PGOOakes1923-PGO Posts: 419 ✭✭✭✭

    I think you answered your own question with your last remark. They are already in Lightship, so.......

    Keep in mind that more goes into a nomination then just an image, so if the contributor made a compelling argument to get it accepted there really isn't any issue here. Niantic has made it very clear that the overwhelming majority of trail markers are eligible, even if they look to be "generic" as they still promote exploration and exercise. In your OP you mentioned that these are part of public right-of-away in fields. That being the case they are 100% eligible under Niantic's current guidance and clarification. Short of faked nominations these types of submissions should be accepted in nearly all cases. Hence why you are seeing them in game.

  • Shottix-INGShottix-ING Posts: 70 ✭✭✭

    I do think a yellow arrow that can be purchased for £3.99 online and stuck on any fence you see in a field shouldn't be encouraged to be accepted as a waypoint, even the legitimate ones are simply to show a walker a designated path or right of way, if a submitter makes up a trail name then that is falsifying a trail. I highly doubt anyone would approve a marker if it was called "public footpath" thanks for your comment.

  • Shottix-INGShottix-ING Posts: 70 ✭✭✭

    I don't think that a common marker that you see in every field can be considered a trail marker, The term trail would indicate it has a name and specific markers to follow, if your logic is true I could follow these generic yellow markers from one field to the next, where is it taking me? This definitely comes under the generic side of it and the reason the ones I posted in game are live is because the submitter called them a fake trail name which doesn't exist. Thanks for your comment

  • JillJilyJabadoo-PGOJillJilyJabadoo-PGO Posts: 1,081 ✭✭✭✭✭

    In the US, I would agree with you, but reading posts by UK reviewers, I think these are used differently than what we're used to in the US. If they say they should be rejected in that country, I'll go along with that if I ever find myself doing any UK reviews.

    I would still pass similar markers in the States, though, as they don't occur here unless there is an actual trail to follow.

  • Aeryle88-PGOAeryle88-PGO Posts: 432 ✭✭✭

    According to the rules, i think all of them are eligible.

  • Gazzas89-PGOGazzas89-PGO Posts: 1,903 ✭✭✭✭✭

    While I agree the public path marker is not acceptable you arw working off the old guidelines in saying it needs to be named, you already know that's not needed anymore so why did you post this as though it is?

  • Gazzas89-PGOGazzas89-PGO Posts: 1,903 ✭✭✭✭✭

    One thing you said reminds me of a quote from a novel series I love. "Journey before destination"

  • Oakes1923-PGOOakes1923-PGO Posts: 419 ✭✭✭✭

    Which, if true, would be a regional distinction and not something that Niantic can adjudicate when writing a global standard. That’s the point.

  • Gazzas89-PGOGazzas89-PGO Posts: 1,903 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Thats not true thoigh, there's several hiking trails that have markers but aren't named, you going ro say they aren't allowed? What about local run things such as what the council next to mine did, where they set up a load of markers along walkways to get people out and exploring/exercising but have them marked as "route a" "route b" etc. They not good enough?

  • sogNinjaman-INGsogNinjaman-ING Posts: 3,271 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Most "official" hiking trails have a name and are listed on one or more websites. You can't just point to a dirt track in the woods and say "well this bit is a hiking trail so it's a POI".

    Similarly, "a load of markers" - No - things like A or B or 1 or 2 are not eligible for me.

  • PkmnTrainerJ-INGPkmnTrainerJ-ING Posts: 3,077 ✭✭✭✭✭

    But Niantic thought it okay to confirm about the National Cycle Network signs which are everywhere around the UK in another thread?

  • Shottix-INGShottix-ING Posts: 70 ✭✭✭

    I very much agree with this and this is how I feel. Many of these are being submitted as a "trail" from one village to the next, they aren't trails, I do agree with others that named trails or walking routes with a searchable name should be approved, but a £3.99 marker which can be bought on ebay and stuck anywhere with no valid trail existing is very open to have 5 of these in every field as a waypoint. Where does it end?

  • sogNinjaman-INGsogNinjaman-ING Posts: 3,271 ✭✭✭✭✭

    They agreed with some of them, not all. Until then, no trail name, no approval.

  • PkmnTrainerJ-INGPkmnTrainerJ-ING Posts: 3,077 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Yeah, the NCN thread tends to be what those nominating public footpaths etc. link back to. It’s very annoying to see them get accepted when other proper trailmarkers get rejected multiple times or have to go through an Appeal to get accepted.

  • Oakes1923-PGOOakes1923-PGO Posts: 419 ✭✭✭✭

    You're missing the point, Niantic confirmed that their guidance applies here and it was ok to move forward with these kinds of signs in some/most cases. Where they drew the line was the random bike symbol on what otherwise was a street sign. Symbols for Bike Lanes no, Markers for Bike paths yes. So they took at regional issue and applied the current global standard to it.

    That would be different then if they had said something like, "in the rest of the world these are ok but in the UK the community has decided to reject them so we've changed our standard for this region".

    It's not the same debate.

  • Gazzas89-PGOGazzas89-PGO Posts: 1,903 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 6

    So despite the fact these markers are put up by the local council for exercising and exploring they arent good enough? Meeting 2 of the criteria niantic wants by the councils own words isn't good enough? Im now genuinely wondering, what fo you even get from reviewing now? You don't like niantics guidelines, you ignore them constantly, you don't give advice on how to improve nominations on here, so what do you actually get out of this?


    Edit, to be clear, im talking about the lettered routes in reply, not the hiking trails

    Post edited by Gazzas89-PGO on
  • VladDraco-PGOVladDraco-PGO Posts: 560 ✭✭✭✭

    As Jilljily said, it's not true to say they put up for exercising and exploring, they are just signs saying "you can walk here".

    They don't indicate "this way is part of a hiking trail".

    Hiking trails have markers with the name of the trail on them, like everywhere. There's no UK exception, they are just more cautious about saying to people which footpaths are private and which are public.

  • sogNinjaman-INGsogNinjaman-ING Posts: 3,271 ✭✭✭✭✭

    As above. Not all footpaths are "trails", but some "trails" make use of some or all parts of a footpath. A footpath is a "Public right of way", and is something usually long established, often due to long term use. It basically says, "the public are allowed on this land provided they follow the route of the footpath as laid out and do not stray off it", which is why there are so many mass produced, generic, placed at every hedgerow and field boundary or turn on the footpath yellow arrow markers. Landowners may not block off a footpath or prevent people from using it. he councils have not set them up for the public to "explore". The signs are not "trail markers" but waymarkers to show the public where they may legally walk .

    For those of you interested in the subject, the type and style of the various markers are can be found in this document: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/414626/waymarking-rights-of-way.pdf

    So, back to the original posed by the OP. The "standard, officially defined" basic footpath signs are mass produced, generic and not interesting, and most footpaths are just that, a numbered route on the official footpath map. There are 1000s and 1000s of them - more then postboxes, more than pubs, more than churches or historc sculpture. There are too many of them. They are identical. They are generic. They are not interesting. They are not eligible.

    Now, put an official trail name on them and that changes things - they become a trail marker. Whether you like it or not, they are "Niantic approved" so should be considered eligible. Whether you have to accept every single identically named marker at 50m intervals is another question. How do you know a trail marker is "official" (ie not faked) or in the correct place (I have seen nominations for both)? Check check out the Long Distance Walkers Association website: https://ldwa.org.uk/ldp/members/search_by_path.php

Sign In or Register to comment.